On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 07:05:12AM +1000, Dan Treacy wrote:
> dan@silentbob:~$ cat /proc/meminfo
[..snip..]
>
> So am I reading this right in saying even though I've only got say 50M
> free out of my 380 odd since 145Mb or so is cached that's "free" in a
> way too??
Yes, "cached" and "buffers" are just the kernel optimising disk access. If
a program requires more memory, then some of that memory is made available
to it. The kernel is just making use of memory that would otherwise be
doing nothing. See also:
http://lists.slug.org.au/archives/slug/2001/September/msg00744.html
> To be honest when the exact same box was running XP previously t this is
> was doing so a great deal better. I know Linux shouldn't be running like
> this and I'd appreciate anyone who could hit me with a cluestick as to
> why.
What kernel version are you running (use "uname -a" to find out)? Early
2.4.x kernels had some serious issues with memory management.
-Andrew.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
